About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 19
MSNBC 17
CSPAN 6
CNN 2
CNNW 2
CSPAN2 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
KTVU (FOX) 1
WBFF (FOX) 1
WETA 1
WMPT (PBS) 1
WTTG 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 72
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 72 (some duplicates have been removed)
. remember? he lost to john mccain that year. but that year, 2008, also was not john mccain's first effort at winning the republican presidential nomination. he had run before as well. he had run in the year 2000, when he lost to george w. bush. and while that john mccain campaign and his loss that year has mostly been remembered for the egregiously racist dirty tricks played against john mccain in the south carolina primary that year, that's mostly what we think of when we think of him losing to george w. bush that year, now what is starting to become the more salient thing about that losing run, about that losing attempt at winning the republican presidential nomination, what seems more salient now is who john mccain's national co-chair was for that run. it was republican senator chuck hagel. there he is. you can see him in the little circle on the left there. with john mccain's entourage as john mccain was getting ready to launch his presidential bid back in 2000. this is the same chuck hagel who is president obama's nominee for defense secretary now and who john mccain spent the day to
"hardball." ♪ >>> i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. why is john mccain so angry? 40 years after the vietnam p.o.w.s came home, the most famous of them is angrier than ever. why is america, why are we fighting the vietnam war all over again in the united states senate? the ticked off vitriol against chuck hagel. what is it about is? is it for show? is it about something hagel said in the cloakroom? is it the unfairness of vietnam itself that some went and sond didn't. is it about johnson's inability to win that war or end it. what burns so deeply in john mccain these days? it seems to excite those who knew nothing about vietnam but want to replay it. we big into the deep well of resentment purning in john mccain's patriotic heart. a resentment not against the north vietnamese who imprisoned and tr toured him all those years, no the against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stain mccain's reputation back in 2000, but against a guy who fought against fear and ralliesed against wounds just like he did in the same army of america's long nightmare in v
featuring senator john mccain talking to senator hagel about the comments he made about the surge in iraq. >> will you please answer the question? were you correct or incorrect when he said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since the vietnam? were you correct or incorrect? >> my reference -- >> are you answering the question? that is a pretty straightforward question. i would like an answer on whether you're right or wrong. you're free to elaborate than. >> i am not going to give you a yes or no answer. >> let the record show that you refuse to answer that question. please go ahead. >> if you like me to explain why a -- >> i act like an answer. >> i will not give you a yes or no. it is far more complicated to that. i will defer my judgment to history. as to the comment i made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since vietnam, it was about not just the search but the overall tour of choice going into iraq. -- war of choice going into iraq. that particular decision made on the search, but more to the point, or war in iraq, i think
republicans from the hab gel nomination. >> reporter: senator john mccain said what we've been reporting which is after this recess the senate will up the nomination and the expectation senator chuck hagel will votes necessary to be confirmed. his colleague, senator lindsey graham explained why. >> because i do believe the president has great deference. here's the question for of the country. can we do better than that? i think so. the president chose a controversial nominee that refuses to sign letters supporting israel during the 2000 infin todd today. refused to iranian guard as terrorist organization. refused to sign a letter asking the e.u. designates hezbollah as a terrorist organization. >> reporter: graham called him one most unqualified, radical choices for secretary of defense in a long time, jenna. jenna: those comments out there. the obama administration not too happy about the comments and the process being held up. what is the administration saying about why it need the new national security team now? >> reporter: keep in mind the smart considering nominations for new secretary o
hitters. house democratic leader nancy pelosi. and senator john mccain. pelosi and mccain only on "fox news sunday." then, senators grill the president's nominee for cia director over the targeted killing of terrorist suspects. we will ask our sunday panel about new demands to lift the veil on drone strikes. and our power player of the week can tell you almost everything the president does and how you often he does it. all right now on "fox news sunday." >> chris: and hello again from fox news in washington. when president obama delivers his state of the union is speech tuesday, one big issue will be sequestration. $85 billion in automatic spending cuts due to kick in march 1. the white house now warns this will mean damaging layoffs of teachersers law enforcement and food safety inspectors and the pentagon will be hit, too. they propose a mix of spending cuts and, yes, more taxes through limiting deductions for the wealthy. i sat down late friday with house democratic leader nancy pelosi and asked her are about the fast approaching deadline. congress woman pa lo pelosi, we back to "fo
. chris wallace has exclusive interviews with house minority leader nancy pelosi and senator john mccain. you don't want to miss that. i'm unroberts in for -- i'm john roberts in for shannon bream today. have a great rest of our weekend and if you are in new england get to shoveling now before the rain comes in later captioned by closed captioning services, inc. >> chris: i'm chris wallace. what is the state of our union? foreign and domestic? as president obama prepares to address the nation tuesday, he faces a buzzsaw of issues. automatic spending cuts. gun control. immigration reform. and the resurgent al-qaeda. we will talk about all this with two of washington's heavy hitters. house democratic leader nancy pelosi. and senator john mccain. pelosi and mccain only on "fox news sunday." then, senators grill the president's nominee for cia director over the targeted killing of terrorist suspects. we will ask our sunday panel about new demands to lift the veil on drone strikes. and our power player of the week can tell you almost everything the president does and how you often he does it.
and before him, john mccain, before him bob dole. don't fight. you're all losers. your tea party crazies and your establishment people, you're all wrong, wrong wrong wrong losers losers, losers. these fake conservatives need to go away before they do more damage. >> stephanie: lurching back and forth between the tea party crazies and the g.o.p. establishment losers. >> any kind of moderation of any kind. >> stephanie: let's review the fun facts of karl rove. spe they went 82,000 television spots to help romney. in senate races 10 of the 12 candidates they supported lost. four of the nine house candidates they backed. [ applause ] then a lot of disastrous tea party candidates lost, too. so please give them some props for their loserdom. julie in seattle tells me it is right-wing world on the interwebs for us. stop the islamist witch-hunt against representative bachmann. sign the petition. >> islamist? witch-hunt? >> stephanie: witch-hunt against michele bachmann. >> since when do they believe in witches? >> stephanie: they banned this video. a guy in the fema coffin. tea party 2.0, rebran
they are going to vote for him. john mccain saying he would oppose any filibuster on his confirmation vote. >> it seems michael. there aren't. lined see gram of south carolina has indicated he would like to see president obama nominate someone else and chuck hagel's name removed for contention but there is no one saying they are going to filibuster. it looks like it will go through. you have seen very powerful outside groups at play in the election weigh in heavily, spending half a million dollars on nationally televised ads against chuck hagel's nomination but it doesn't look like there are big road blocks here. >> national televised ads against chuck hagel have no impact on the decision. >> their plan was to target democrats up for reelection in 2014, hope the pressure of the public to call their elected officials and get them to vote no on hagel. there are some folks like jim inhofe, the ranking member on the senate armed services, who will vote no. >> is itt doesn't have to be 100%. >> the bottom line is there aren't enough republicans out there saying
there is a possibility of direct talks with iran. republican senator john mccain telling reuters he would have no objection to direct talks, but questioned how much these with cheese -- would achieve its fundamental questions about the iranian nuclear program are unresolved. [video clip] >> our policy is not containment. it is to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we have also made clear that the iranian leaders need not sentence their people to economic isolation. there is still time and space for diplomacy, backed by pressure, to succeed. the ball is in the government of iran's courts. host: if we were able to begin negotiations with iran and its intentions for to ease between the u.s. in iran, which became a huge problem to present jimmy carter in 1979 with the hostage situation, if we make progress, how would that use the entire neighborhood and countries around iran and afghanistan? guest: it depends on how the israelis interpret this. the israelis believe they have more to fear about iran's nuclear capabilities and the rest of the name of the. i have read -- than the rest of t
that did not harm but would gather information. this administration ran against john mccain saying, even though john mccain agreed, yeah, we don't want to water board, we don't want to do anything that somebody might someday call torture, they complained, gee, this is allowing radicals to be recruited against the united states because of the unjust nature of doing a procedure that's not harmful to someone's health, to gather information to save american lives, which it did. here we are now with this administration that thought waterboarding helped jeeyaddists -- jihadists recruit more radicals using a process of having a high administration official think to himself or herself, i don't think this may be enough. blow them up. without giving adequate consideration to civilians who will be killed, to family members who will be upset, to the ability of our enemies to use that to recruit other radicals, many times over, to replace those that have been killed with a drone strike. this administration's systemic failure to understand what the muslim brotherhood calls, quote, civilization jihad,
crimes? >> john mccain thought this was the big question. >> did you disagree on president obama on the surge in afghanistan? >> but in fact this is the most pressing question facing the new secretary of defense. >> when we hear report that is there are upwards of 19,000 sexual assaults in the military against women it is unacceptable. i need a strong commitment from you that you will treat our ment military families in the way that you would look after your own. >> on the issue of sexual assaults the devil is the military i don't know if you have seen "the in visible war". >> yes. >> i would ask that your commitment to the prosecution and holding accountable the people who are involved in this but also the victim. >> yes, i will agree to that. >> yes, sexual assault in the military is the issue facing the secretary of defense. he has no voice on his country's policy on israel. every minute spent on that today in that hearing was a complete waste of time. and there is no disagreement on this country's policy towards israel. all democrats in the senate disagree with republicans on
wonder how you ever stomached sitting next to hagel for all those years or how john mccain could have said this in 2000 about secretary of defense positions. >> there's a lot of people that could do that. one of them i think is senator chuck hagel. >> then there were the democrats on the committee who seemed intent to steer clear of big questions opting instead to praise hagel's war service, praise israel or gently lead the witness back to approved foreign policy bromides and away tr dangerous taboos. >> your commitment that i ran should not under any circumstances have had ability to have a nuclear weapon. and i appreciate that position very much. >> and i appreciate your taking the time to meet with me. we had an extensive discussion and your understanding of the complex challenges we face in the middle east and the importance of our alliance with israel. >> i would like for you as the committee is getting to know you, know something about your service in vietnam and your combat experience. were you wounded, senator hagel? >> finally, there was the nominee himself, who appeared to h
for john mccain and mitt romney. there's no conservative movement left. i want to say that i am officially done and my two brothers are with their families with republicans. i guess i call myself a man without a party. marco rubio will give the response in spanish and english. this is just -- it started with karl rove, the architect, that little nerd -- if i see him one more time on tv -- is the architect of the destruction of the gop. he gave us obama. the idea of reaching out and becoming democrats. what democrats aren't are people who believe in a group identity and hyphenated americanism. we conservatives believe in assimilation. that's why he's not going to give a response in german or italian. we will hear all the lofty platitudes and trite things from obama about a nation of immigrants. it was a somewhat perverse people being melted down by the fires of assimilation and being made similar -- it was a people meltedrdiverse down by the fires of assimilation. nobody would know marco rubio. he looks like the beaver. i will not follow him because he is a trendy minority. having to reach
to be confirmed. one thing that's interesting, john mccain, remember, has said that he believes chuck hagel will be confirmed ultimately. john mccain, by the way, was not one of those senators who wrote that letter to the white house asking the president to withdraw chuck hagel's nomination. >> kristen welker e thanks so much with you and we'll check back with you later in the show. >> sounds good. >>> after nearly 40 years in public office, defense secretary leon panetta may have thought he'd be retired by now, but he thought wrong. panetta is still on the job. at a nato brussels in conference, a conference that was supposed to be intended by former senator chuck hagel. hagel has not taken the mantel as they blocked him heading out to recess. mallika henderson, political reporter at "the washington post" and john stanton, washington bureau chief, thank you both for being here. >> john, i want to start with you. citing panetta is not the man that the audience thought they'd be hearing from. does washington's ability portray any weakness to the international community? >> i don't know if it'
:30. >> bill: if they call a filibuster and john mccain said he would not support a filibuster, it looks like there would be 60 votes to stop the filibuster. >> that's right. >> bill: can you stop -- do you know, can you stop a hold? if inhoff puts a hold on, that's not a filibuster. that's a different animal, right? >> it's a delay. it's a delay tactic. so i think it merely pushes it off into the future. >> bill: but my understanding one senator can put a hold on somebody's nomination and until that senator agrees to lift it, there's nothing the other senators can do. is that correct? >> we saw that a lot with coburn putting a hold on everything, on legislation, on spending legislation. the pressure here will be fairly remarkable. >> bill: to go along without a secretary of defense. >> i think pressure from the pentagon, military leaders the public not having a guy in charge of the pentagon. it's not going to be sustainable for them. >> bill: the center for american progress has a lot of ties to the white house. so you're going to be live blogging tonight. what does that mean? >> he's going
'm reading it. i want to. yes. when the soviets like john mccain tells you you belch too much, soak and spew too much fire, you know you've got a problem. >> she likes it. that's a bad day. that's a bad day. >> this is not painful for her. >> like three, four days later, she's still laughing. >> when someone says something about you, that's a bad day. ted cruz, a republican freshman in the senate out front and center in his republicans' efforts to josh chuck hagel has a problem. he's an honoree piece of work, just six weeks from arrival, he's already known for nay saying and his nitpicking and his itch to upbraid lawmakers who are vastly senior to him who have sacrificed more than he has and who deserve a measure of respect. or at least courtesy that isn't his me kirks er. he was head of the harvard debate team. >> princeton or harvard. >> a very bright guy. >> a little too big for his britches. >> people that knew him before said you would like him. >> he has been kicking shins, being comparely rude and i guess maybe it's all a marketing ploy to raise the most money among conservatives nati
was to the right of hillary clinton during the xanl for going into pakistan and not -- he -- >> john mccain. >> on pakistan he was, right. this shouldn't be that big of a surprise that he is hawkish. this has been one of the central tensions, but sort of aspects of the obama presidency. >> i hear what you're saying. at the same time, you know, he came into office under the banner of no longer will there be black sites. we are closing gitmo. extraordinary rendition. these kind of practices put in place by george w. bush. that is going to be -- we're going to close that chapter in american history. what this reveals is that that chapter is far from being closed. it's still being written. >> we are still arguing based on the movie "zero dark thirty" whether or not enhanced interrogation, torture, helped us get osama bin laden, and you hear conflicting reports about whether or not that was true. if you ask the average person, does interrogation enhance interrogation, does torture work? you'll get ten different anz. we are as a country very much grappling with these questions and trying to sort
, and the joint chiefs chairman, general martin dempsey. arizona republican john mccain asked about a report that president obama rejected a proposal to arm syrian rebels last summer. >> did you support the recommendation by secretary of state... then secretary of state clinton and then head of c.i.a. general petraeus that we provide weapons to the resistance in syria? did you support that? >> we did. >> you did support that. >> we did. >> suarez: so far, the president's judgment has been that things won't get better with american arms. instead, he's warned the weapons might fall into the hands of extremist elements, a concern reiterated today by the new secretary of state, who was asked about the deliberations last year. >> i don't know what the discussions were in the white house and i'm not going backwards. the new administration, we're going forward from this point. there are serious questions about al nusra and a.q.i.-- al qaeda in iraq-- and other violent groups on ground. >> suarez: those groups are among the most effective fighters against the assad regime. they include jabhat al nus
with the transition candidates barack obama and john mccain and the team representing president george w. bush. for more information on her publications, and proudly, she is a member of the board of directors of the white house historical association. >> we have a wonderful panel here, it represents people that have worked in the white house over several administrations in the residence staff and people that have come with particular president at first ladies. we will get a sense of the environment that a first lady operates in. it is a difficult place to be, in some ways as beautiful as the white house is, it is a museum. it is obviously a residence. it is a park. and it is a workplace. and all of those combined for the first lady, opportunities for her and for her husband, those hazards as they live their lives in the white house. it is also a place for children, a place to raise a family. with a first lady that receives no compensation for what she does, it is a difficult thing to say exactly what her role is. we will talk about the environment and particular first lady's because our paneli
and john mccain who said that they would close guantanamo if they became president. it was also the guy who was still president, the guy who had opened up guantanamo in the first place. >> i'd like to end guantanamo. i'd like it to be over with. >> everybody knew that guantanamo was going to close. there was nobody against it. the prisoners who were still there when barack obama became president, well, the expectation was that a lot of them would continue to be processed the way that hundreds of them had already been processed by president george w. bush, which is that they would be sent to some other country. they would be repatriated. for the prisoners that were not going to be released anywhere for say the marquee prisoner who was ever held at guantanamo, khalid shaikh mohamud, the expectation for guys like him was they wouldn't get out of off juror pseudo limbo in cuba. they would get off that legal limbo that we hold in this prison offshore in a communist country that we don't have relations with and get out of that limbo and come here and face justice. attorney general eric holder ann
it. and so both senator john mccain and lindsey graham, republicans who are, you know, you would think -- who were also raising questions about hagel, turned on him at some point and basically said that he had gone beyond the pale. so i think you're right in wondering if there are some parts of this country where what's allowable is a different standard. i have to say i think you got it so right when you described what characterizes this kind of speech, though. when i was there, what so struck me was the specificity, the weird specificity of 12 professors on the harvard law who are communist and want to see the overthrow of the u.s. government. it seemed so on the face of it improbable to me, knowing harvard law school, which is basically turning out the men and women who are the pillars of the united states legal establishment, including many members of the united states supreme court. and so -- but it was that specificity that makes it sound like there must be something in it here. and -- but he never did name who they were. so when i wanted to follow up on this after there had
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 72 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)